Maddow: Democrats can’t win without the unions

posted at 10:01 am on June 7, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Actually, I don’t disagree with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on this point, but I do disagree with her on what it means. Maddow argues that efforts to roll back collective bargaining privileges for unions — which she defines too broadly — means that unions will have less cash to spend on political activism, and that without the influx of that cash, Democrats simply can’t compete. But Maddow blames that on the reforms when she should be blaming it on the Democrats themselves:

“The Wisconsin Republicans, under Scott Walker, were using public policy to essentially dismantle public sector unions in Wisconsin. And that — however you feel about union rights in the country — it had one very practical, partisan effect, which is that the unions had been big supporters of Democratic candidates and Democratic causes and had had a lot to do with the Democratic ground game. So if they go away — in terms of whether or not that corporate money that’s disproportionately supporting Republicans can be answered — at least on the Democratic side, before there is some kind of reform, Democrats do not have a way to compete in terms of big outside money in elections. And that is the reality now in Wisconsin. It is the reality in states where they have essentially eliminated unions rights.”

Democrats have every opportunity to raise the same kind of cash that Republicans do. There are no industry assignments for donors to parties. Barack Obama is in the middle of a two-day trip to raise $15 million in California, mainly from the entertainment industry, for instance. Democrats have launched super-PACs and have their own sugar daddies like George Soros and Warren Buffett to match the Koch Brothers.

The problem for Democrats is that they have become the party of the public-employee unions, and therefore the party of institutionalized and unaccountable bureaucracies. Maddow defines union reform too broadly; the reform in Wisconsin, for instance, dealt entirely with public-employee unions, not private-sector unions, and didn’t even include all PEUs. Furthermore, the money raised by Republicans (and Democrats in other contexts) are entirely voluntary. Until Act 10 took effect in Wisconsin, the state seized dues on behalf of the unions whether employees wanted to fund the political efforts of the unions or not, which the unions then used to elect politicians that would keep enforcing those seizures. Doesn’t Maddow have even a twinge of shame to see the vast exodus from the union membership after Act 10, which demonstrates that the only reason the “donations” for their political efforts was by force?

Democrats made the choice to become the party of institutionalized and unaccountable bureaucracy; in Wisconsin, they practically adopted that as a motto in the recall election. They are now only beginning to realize that the public is fed up with the costs and gross inefficiencies of government at all levels, and especially of the sick relationship between PEUs and the politicians they help election. In my column for The Fiscal Times today, I call this a watershed moment for the public-sector union movement:

Immediately, complaints arose over a disparity in financing between the two candidates in the recall election as an excuse for the unions’ failure. Scott Walker raised a huge amount of money, a good portion from outside of Wisconsin, while Democrats and the unions circulated recall petitions. However, the unions spent millions of dollars to get the recall election in the first place, and then provided a large boost to Barrett in organizing and GOTV efforts. Those actually succeeded – turnout was high in Democratic areas – but Walker’s GOTV outpaced the union efforts as voters thundered to the polls to support the governor and his PEU reforms.

That is a bad sign for labor, with its modern reliance on organizing in the public sector. Walker pulled back the green curtain on the unhealthy relationship between PEUs and politicians, which creates an accountability gap on spending and an obstacle to efficiency in government. Instead of taxpayers controlling the size of government, the PEUs ensure that they control policy, mainly by forcing the state to fund political operations, through mandatory state-collected dues and ridiculously overpriced benefits from union-owned providers, such as the WEAC Trust in Wisconsin prior to the Act 10 reforms.

So yes, I agree with Maddow that Democrats can’t compete in the future with the kind of funding disparity that results when unions can no longer seize parts of workers’ paychecks without asking. But Democrats can’t compete because of their alliance with these union bosses and the sclerotic, entrenched bureaucracies they spawn and grow. If Democrats really want to compete, they need a reality check with actual voters rather than kissing the rings of Big Labor.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

IOW, Maddow thinks Democrats cannot win if unions cannot force people to pay union dues the union bosses then use to campaign for and pay off Democratic politicians.

And she sees nothing wrong with this “arrangement”.

Because Comrade Maddow sees nothing wrong with forcing people to pay union dues they otherwise would not pay. After all, it is for their own good. Sometimes the little people workers must be told what is best for them and what to do by their betters, by the people looking out for them because they are too stupid to do it for themselves — people like Comrade Maddow and the union bosses.

All this GOP versus Dems in raising money is near ludicrous. The left has by default received millions upon millions of free ads from every major media source.

Obama worship has been a 24/7/365 affair with those mainstream media folks who have failed the American people annd their constitutional responsibility by hiding the unflattering truth and creating from whole cloth, messiah worship.

If Maddow means that Walker disconnected the public employee unions from compulsory taxpayer donations and, therefore, the Democrat Party will have less money to spend, then I agree completely with her.

Where we disagree is that I think the thievery in which the Democrats previously engaged is a bad thing. She likes it.

Exit question for Madcow … who represents the taxpayers in PEU negotiations? They wised up in Wisconsin, and apparently, to an extent, in San Diego and San Jose. Ungracious winners and sore losers, the left!

What? Then why are there 3 unions at my place of employment (VA hospital)? And if you are interested, I’ve been watching them (the unions) ruin every effort to serve our Veterans with the care they deserve at this facility (and others). Federal Public Sector Unions Must GO!

Amen. More people on our side need to call out the Dems on this crybaby bullsh!t of “being outspent 7 to 1″. Clearly they’re not counting all the money the unions spent forcing the recall, bussing in the trouble makers that trashed the state capitol, and then waging an unsuccessful primary battle against Barrett.

True. They also are not counting the costs of all the Democratic legislators running and hiding in other states so they would not have to vote and risk losing; the costs of all the payroll time lost when many public employees were protesting and rioting on state time when they were supposed to be working; and the property damage caused by rioting union members and other paid trouble makers, to name a few. And these costs were all laid directly on the taxpayers, while support for Gov. Walker was essentially derived from voluntary contributions by stakeholders who saw benefits in reducing the stranglehold that public employees unions have had on state budgets in Wisconsin and elsewhere.

While the Dems and unions were heavily outspent leading into the recall vote, keep in mind that none of this would have been necessary if they had not “picked the fight” by forcing the recall.

It is also very telling that the largest public union in WI experienced a 50% drop in membership in a little over a year when the law was changed to allow membership to be a matter of choice instead of being forced upon employees. Guess they were not as fond of having dues extorted from their paycheck and given to the Democratic party as the union thought they were!

Nothing was taken away from the government unions except the ability to force all employees, whether voluntary members or not, to pay dues. And as soon as they had that choice, well over 40% of the government employees stopped paying union dues.

The left will continue to do their best to portray this as an attack against all unions, but it must be repeated every time they do, that this impacted government unions only. The very phrase, “government unions” should be an oxymoron in this nation. There is no good reason for a government, whether state or federal, to be joined at the hip with any union.

I think the Democrat party has outlived its usefulness in representing the American people and should go the way of the dinosaur. It will be fun watching their coffers dry up and their candidates lose against an onslaught of patriotic political contributions and motivated right-wing grassroots activists.

The end is nigh, Democrats. The end is nigh.

Punchenko on June 7, 2012 at 10:43 AM

We’ll see what we have after giving Romney 4 years to respond to the onslaught of motivated right-wing grassroots activists. I’m skeptically optimistic, but should Romney fail to deliver, the GOP will have also outlived its usefulness and should also go the way of the dinosaur.

If Romney fails to govern conservatively, I’ll be all-in on a new conservative, constitutionalist party in 2016.

What? Then why are there 3 unions at my place of employment (VA hospital)? And if you are interested, I’ve been watching them (the unions) ruin every effort to serve our Veterans with the care they deserve at this facility (and others). Federal Public Sector Unions Must GO!
smylatu on June 7, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I spent twenty two years as a DoD civilian and let me tell you, they can and are unionized. The first union in my workplace was NFFE; National Federation of Federal Employees. They weren’t seen as strong enough and were voted out and replaced by ACT: Association of Civilian Technicians. Don’t kid youreself, they’re there. Most of the NFFE National officers (not locals) were ex-PATCO union goons fired by Reagan for striking.

Democrats made the choice to become the party of institutionalized and unaccountable bureaucracy

its a chicken and egg problem. Did the dictators come first or did those that wanted dictorship come first. The unions require force to survive the dems require the unions to survive. thus wer ethe PEU’s set up to ensure the dictators easy free money to fund their control schemes or did the people create the PEU’s so that they could be ruled by the dictators because they hate freedom.

If Romney fails to govern conservatively, I’ll be all-in on a new conservative, constitutionalist party in 2016.

Harbingeing on June 7, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I fail to see how a liberal will govern conservatively. I guess if he really worries about his job then maybe. but his first impluse will always be bigger “smarter” government. I see Mitt hasn’t said anything about bloomberg’s soda ban wonder why?

I spent twenty two years as a DoD civilian and let me tell you, they can and are unionized. The first union in my workplace was NFFE; National Federation of Federal Employees. They weren’t seen as strong enough and were voted out and replaced by ACT: Association of Civilian Technicians. Don’t kid youreself, they’re there. Most of the NFFE National officers (not locals) were ex-PATCO union goons fired by Reagan for striking.

Big John on June 7, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Where I work, it’s AFGE, NFFE, and I don’t know what the other one is….it’s the one for the IT department. The NFFE president is a pharmacist, paid a pharmacist’s salary….and has not worked as a pharmacist at the facility for many, many years. The AFGE president at another facility is a physician, paid a physician’s salary! I’m not sure if he has any duties as a physician. From my point of view, they are much more interested in maintaining their power and not serving the interest of the employees or the Veterans. Leadership at the VA appears to be putty in their hands.

If Dems want to compete how about they rely on the small donor, I remember we were told that this is how The Whine won last election :)…well, how about the Dems do the same :)…with their amazing and policies that they present to their electorate, people should have no problem opening their wallets and donate to them :)..

If ther party’s ideology appealed to donors (corporate or otherwise), they wouldn’t have to rely on legislating their campaign funds through mandatory union dues and bureaucratic cronyism.

Did they think they could keep forcing working republican voters to donate to the democratic coffers forever?

They may be able to perpetuate the entitlement trap indefinitely, but sooner or later working folk will somehow find a way to stop contributing to those who’s ideology is so destructive to their own lives.

The latest AFGE contract doesn’t even require that an employee call in for sick leave. They need only make one phone call attempt and may leave a voice mail message. And this is the national contract for AFGE….across the whole US.

Well — of course DemocRATS sure as heck cannot run on their record — otherwise they wouldn’t be so desperately in exclusive need of the Unions and their ill-gotten gains in the first place.

But fret not — DemocRATS — you still have your exclusive access to uber-wealthy Hollywood and all of its resident reprobates for use as your own personal political ATM. We’ll see how well that works out for you in November too.

unions will have less cash to spend on political activism, and that without the influx of that cash, Democrats simply can’t compete.

Good grief!

What is it with Democrats this week?

Do they really think that their ideals are so weak that they need massive amount of lawn signs and commercials in order to trick voters?

And do they really think that it’s ok to pay for these lawn signs and commercials by extracting money from workers that don’t want to be in a union and don’t want their money going to advertise Democrat ideals?

Does the fact that they are now admitting this mean that they’ve jumped the shark?

blink on June 7, 2012 at 10:15 AM

It’s all they have left. Flop sweat and desperation.

What are they going to say? That their ideas are tired? That they really don’t understand economics? That their politicians are grifters and idiots?

That the public are FINALLY catching onto them now that they can’t completely control the narrative?

NATCA, the Air Traffic Controllers Union actually negotiated their own pay scale because the Federal (GS) pay scale didn’t go high enough to suit them. Times were good and the government caved and signed the checks.

Disclaimer…I was a controller and benefitted from the pay scale but only at the expense of the taxpayers and it didn’t feel right. I was in my 30’s making more than a GS-15.

I think I would grow up dysfunctional too if my parents gave me a girls name.
NotCoach on June 7, 2012 at 10:05 AM

My daddy left home when I was three
And he didn’t leave much to ma and me
Just this old guitar and an empty bottle of booze.
Now, I don’t blame him cause he run and hid
But the meanest thing that he ever did
Was before he left, he went and named me “Sue.”

Doesn’t Maddow have even a twinge of shame to see the vast exodus from the union membership after Act 10, which demonstrates that the only reason the “donations” for their political efforts was by force?

No. Don’t be silly.

Being a liberal is to be shameless when it comes to ignoring any pesky facts that might lead to cognitive dissonance.

The Wisconsin Republicans, under Scott Walker, were using public policy to essentially dismantle public sector unions in Wisconsin. And that — however you feel about union rights in the country — it had one very practical, partisan effect, which is that the unions had been big supporters of Democratic candidates and Democratic causes and had had a lot to do with the Democratic ground game. So if they go away — in terms of whether or not that corporate money that’s disproportionately supporting Republicans can be answered — at least on the Democratic side, before there is some kind of reform, Democrats do not have a way to compete in terms of big outside money in elections.

Well, guy, that’s what you get for relying on money that can be taken away by the whim of the voting public.

Learn to plan ahead and not simply attach your leeching maw to the first thing that floats by.

WHEN are the authors of this blog DO THEIR JOBS and REPORT what is necessary to report to KILL the falacious narrative the Governor Walker WON his “Recall Vot” – which was LAUNCHED by Liberals, The DNC and Unions – because he SPENT SO MUCH MONEY DOING SO?!!

They should publish a SIMPLE HEADLINE to KILL this LIE:

Liberals, Democrats and Unions Spent $20 Million Dollars on the recall effort.

So yes, I agree with Maddow that Democrats can’t compete in the future with the kind of funding disparity that results when unions can no longer seize parts of workers’ paychecks without asking. But Democrats can’t compete because of their alliance with these union bosses and the sclerotic, entrenched bureaucracies they spawn and grow.

You’d think their first clue would be that when people are given a choice… they RUN from these unions.

Neutering the Democrats won’t mean much, if we don’t clean the RINOs out of the Republican Party.

listens2glenn on June 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM

True. What percentage of Republican pols are RINOs, in your opinion? And does it match the percentage of Republican voters who are moderate-to-RINOey? I wonder how we would find that out.

I’m also wondering: If there are proportionately more RINO pols in Federal office than RINO voters in the U.S, how did that happen?
– Did they get crossover votes from the Dems (that’s often the argument made for nominating a RINO in the first place)?
– Did the RINO get the official endorsement of the local GOP (who would then be RINOs, too, of course)?
– Was the RINO a better fundraiser? (and if so, why?)
– Were there other factors (the RINO was the best-looking candidate — don’t laugh! — or a scandal was fomented against the conservative candidate, etc.)?

WHEN are the authors of this blog DO THEIR JOBS and REPORT what is necessary to report to KILL the falacious narrative the Governor Walker WON his “Recall Vot” – which was LAUNCHED by Liberals, The DNC and Unions – because he SPENT SO MUCH MONEY DOING SO?!!

They should publish a SIMPLE HEADLINE to KILL this LIE:
…

williamg on June 7, 2012 at 1:41 PM

They’ll probably be glad to, if you send a link to that info to mailto:[email protected]

Doesn’t Maddow have even a twinge of shame to see the vast exodus from the union membership after Act 10, which demonstrates that the only reason the “donations” for their political efforts was by force?

No. Don’t be silly.

Being a liberal is to be shameless when it comes to ignoring any pesky facts that might lead to cognitive dissonance.

novaculus on June 7, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Here in Ohio, when I was still working.. the Union, local 1035 of the UFCW had to hand out cards that you had to sign in order that they could use your dues as they wished for political organizing. Great idea,.. but one problem…

The union didn’t like that you said no to them funding the radical left. When I refused, oddly the only one out of our “shop” or work place… so they said… They first were confused,.. no?.. why?.. because I’m a conservative and don’t want you funding democrats with my money. oh….. OH..REALLY? the short version?

—

got screwed blued and tatooed by the union.. lost my job, our home, and 4 years of poverty on my wife’s wages as we struggled through my surgeries, and treatment. Finally we climbed out of that hole, I was accepted on Social Security Disability. After all the misery the union caused us..

given a chance to do it again..

I would not only refuse to sign, but would have torn it into small pieces then flushed them down the toilet.

I have a feud now.. something my family is well familiar with.

game on.

The saddest part,.. my co-workers were well aware of what was happening, and who was being made an example of. They many of them, expressed the fear to me, they now are as afraid of the union, as they are of the corporation. More so.. since to the corporation, it’s not personal.. from the union, it’s like a mob hit.

Making the Unions ask permission to use your dues is a great idea,.. but they should invest some time making it a crime for the unions to retaliate against you in the work place, from using those tactics to instill fear in the work force for antagonizing the Union.

Their old mob ties, taught the unions everything about using intimidation and fear as a tool to control the rank and file, if you make your politics known.

Mark and Karen,
Is there any way to contribute or be a part of a Public Union busting PAC? Is there such an organization? I would love to be a part of that!

Mark,
I’m so sorry to hear of your troubles, but understand and have seen it and experienced it for myself. I’ve had the union president in my face screaming at me and was told to “take the high road” and keep my mouth shut.

So how does this work? All the mindless voters who have never voted Republican in their life are now either not going to vote or will vote Republican because the Democrats don’t have as much money as they used to? Sounds stupid to me but I’ll take it.